I am studying about In-Situ Combustion. I found out the paper (SPE-20250) and the thesis of Dr. Belgrave related to modeling and history matching of Combustion tubet test are very good references. I have tried to re-model the combustion tube model of Dr. Belgrave using the data from the above references including kinetic model, combustion tube description and experiment procedure, ... I used STAR software of Computer Modeling Group (CMG) to do this simulation. Please go to the following link to see the results of my simulation model http://www.mediafire.com/view/tyexfs8ms3q6iqf/Simulation%20Result%20from%20Modeling%20Combustion%20Tube%20Test.PNG
In which, the results show that the temperature profile, cumulative gas curve and cumulative water curve are in good match with the experimental data. However, there is a relative big deviation between the modelled result and experimental results of cumulative oil curve. I have tried to do sensitivity analysis on porosity, permeability, relative permeability, ... with hope that the problem could be solved. However, the results are not significant improved.
Could you help me to figure out what is the main reasons of the deviation, please? I would be very grateful if you could attend my matter.
Thank you so much!
Great job on the temperature profiles, gas and water production curves!
Since SPE20250 was published, we have advanced the technology significantly. First, the H/C ratio of the coke fuel has an inverse relationship with combustion temperature. It will likely be around 0.95. This will have the effect of lower water production if you have used a higher value. Second, the higher cumulative oil curve is related to relative permeability, in particular the residual oil saturation to gas.
Give these a try and let us know the results.